An official website of the United States government
Forests in the United States provide important carbon sequestration services that could be leveraged for climate change mitigation. There is increased interest among decision makers and investors to extend forest carbon payment programs to family forest owners (FFOs), the largest category of private forest owners. Since FFOs manage forests for multiple objectives, it is unclear which contract requirements and payment levels will appeal to early adopters and perhaps establish the direction of innovation. To answer this question, we conducted a comprehensive review of the research literature assessing forest owner preferences for carbon payment programs. Out of 22 papers reviewed, a total of 13 stated preference studies were included in the meta-analysis. Robust regression modeling and benefit transfer techniques were used to generate estimates for carbon payment contracts for different categories of FFOs. Results show significant variation in forest owner willingness to accept (WTA) as a function of management objectives, contract length, number of forest acres, management plan requirement, and management restrictions. Average annual per acre payment values were lowest for conservation-oriented forest owners, followed by passive and production-oriented forest owners. Overall, findings suggest the need for diverse types of contracts and payment levels in order to have widespread participation in carbon programs by forest owners.
more »
« less
Developing Behavioral and Evidence-Based Programs for Wildfire Risk Mitigation
The actions of residents in the wildland–urban interface can influence the private and social costs of wildfire. Wildfire programs that encourage residents to take action are often delivered without evidence of effects on behavior. Research from the field of behavioral science shows that simple, often low-cost changes to program design and delivery can influence socially desirable behaviors. In this research report, we highlight how behavioral science and experimental design may advance efforts to increase wildfire risk mitigation on private property. We offer an example in which we tested changes in outreach messaging on property owners’ interest in wildfire risk information. In partnership with a regional wildfire organization, we mailed 4564 letters directing property owners to visit personalized wildfire risk webpages. By tracking visitation, we observed that 590 letter recipients (12%) sought information about their wildfire risk and response varied by community. This research–practice collaboration has three benefits: innovation in outreach, evidence of innovation through experimental design, and real impacts on interest in wildfire mitigation among property owners. Future collaborations may inform behavioral and evidence-based programs to better serve residents and the public interest as the risks from wildfires are projected to grow.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1823509
- PAR ID:
- 10213027
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Fire
- Volume:
- 3
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 2571-6255
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 66
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Private landowners in the southern Willamette Valley of Oregon, USA were surveyed. The survey queried probabilities of implementing specific fuels reduction projects in extensive areas of specific forest types on their property. The projects were described in relation to the beginning and target forest types, the actions required, costs, and long-term maintenance. Forest types were first rated for scenic beauty and informed levels of wildfire risk reduction, scarce habitat production, and associated property rights risks. Propensities to perform each fuels reduction project were then obtained. These were adversely affected by disbelief in heightened wildfire risks or climate change, higher project costs, feelings of hopeless vulnerability to wildfire, and low aesthetic affections for target forests. Propensities were enhanced by aesthetic affection for target forests, belief in the efficaciousness of fuels reduction, previous experience with wildfire evacuation, and higher incomes. All landowners favored thinning of young conifer forests, but some were averse to thinning of mature conifer forests. Anthropocentric landowners, mainly farmers, foresters, and some small holders, tended to favor conventional thinnings toward commercially valuable conifer forests and avoided long-term habitat maintenance. Nature-centric landowners, mainly some rural residents and wealthy estate owners, leaned more toward long term habitat goals and oak forests.more » « less
-
Scaling up climate-adaptation in wildfire-prone watersheds requires innovative partnerships and funding. Water utilities are one stakeholder group that could play a role in these efforts. The overarching purpose of this study was to understand water utility engagement in wildfire mitigation efforts in the western United States. We conducted an online survey of water utilities in nine states and received 173 useable responses. While most (68%) respondents were concerned or very concerned about future wildfire events and the impact of wildfire on their operations, only 39% perceived their organization as responsible for mitigating wildfire risk. Federal land ownership decreased feeling responsible for wildfire mitigation, while concern for and information on wildfire increased feeling responsible for mitigation. The perception of response efficacy of mitigation actions for the 68 water utilities engaged in wildfire risk mitigation activities was very high, with most agreeing that mitigation actions are effective. Self-efficacy to implement mitigation actions, however, was mixed, with most utilities wanting more information on wildfire risk and impacts to watershed services. The most reported wildfire mitigation actions were forest thinning and stream restoration. Water utilities engaging in these actions typically partnered with government agencies or other water utilities to complete the work and funded these activities through water user fees and grants. Our findings suggest that water utility engagement in wildfire mitigation for water security could be increased through providing more assessments of wildfire risk to water utilities and through more outreach and engagement with water utilities operating on federal lands.more » « less
-
Abstract Currently, more than half of the world’s human population lives in urban areas, which are increasingly affected by climate hazards. Little is known about how multi-hazard environments affect people, especially those living in urban areas in northern latitudes. This study surveyed homeowners in Anchorage and Fairbanks, USA, Alaska’s largest urban centers, to measure individual risk perceptions, mitigation response, and damages related to wildfire, surface ice hazards, and permafrost thaw. Up to one third of residents reported being affected by all three hazards, with surface ice hazards being the most widely distributed, related to an estimated $25 million in annual damages. Behavioral risk response, policy recommendations for rapidly changing urban environments, and the challenges to local governments in mitigation efforts are discussed.more » « less
-
Wildfire presents a growing threat across the American West. We conducted an online choice experiment in Western Colorado to assess how social interactions affect wildfire mitigation decisions through two distinct pathways: risk interdependency (neighbors’ conditions affect perceived wildfire risk) and social norms (neighbors’ actions affect perceptions of appropriate mitigation choices). In contrast to key observational studies, we find that participants are less likely to choose to mitigate when they have more neighbors with sparse vegetation. This effect operates through the risk interdependency pathway: sparse vegetation on neighboring properties lowers participants’ wildfire risk perceptions and appears to be viewed as a substitute for one’s own mitigation actions. In this context, where neighbors are nameless and faceless, social norms do not counteract this negative effect. To reconcile this experimental result with observational studies, we discuss how both risk interdependency and social norms are influenced by geographical and social contexts and highlight how these insights can inform future research and policy action.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3390/fire3040066
